The Memphis appeal. [volume] (Memphis, Tenn.) 1886-1890, 1887-12-11

ANEW tOa\old tue competition OF prison labor Win
lrec labor the nites OF payment for the work done
have TO be studied and regulated by the admins
tration. The rates must lie the same a. those paid
to free Industry for the same kinds of labor The con-
tract system prevails The administration eNertS
itself far possible TO cause 10 he taught 10 the
prisoners previously without regular business
some calling which will enable them, after liberia
ton, 10 gain an honest living
IN enthusiastically penal labor does not exist.
In the Grand Duehy OF Baden the labor OF the CON
Vcis Is let TO contrHctors Trades are taught II Is
sought 10 Introduce variety OF trades 80 that too
many may not be employed on any one to the In
jury of private industry. In Bavaria the prisons
are conducted by their respective administrations.
From the disciplinary and penientary point OF
view the giving of prison labor to contrictorsi is
condemned In Bavaria even though the profit de-
rived thercirom may be greater than II the admins
tmtion carried Il on. In Prussia fifty trades are
taught and the labor let to contractors In saxony
aud Wutemburg also the labor is let TO con
tractors.
IN ITALY Penal labor does not much exist The
contract system Is In operation, and the eonvics
are taught trades.
lS THg NErnERLANDS-Industria labor Is the
only kind In Use, but both the contract system aud
the system 10y which the labor is utilized on nc
count OF the State have place COnyicts are taught
trades.
IL Norway Labor Is managed exclusively by
the administration aud couyicts are taught trades.
Is RusSIA.-lndustrial work which scarcely ex'
listed IN times past is making great progress IL has
produced its best results when let 10 contractors,
IL SWEDEN All labor is industrial, and conyicis
are employed In great variety Of manufactures
IS SwrrLrRLANp-lndus labor obtains and
j. managed by the administration ITSELF ~ Is
lound that penitcntiary training Is Incompatible
with the system OF letting the labor OF prisoners to
contractors. IL " the administration alone that
can feel an Interest In teaching a tmdc TO every
prisoner during his stay In prison. The admins
tmtion, being supreme. can introduce a greater
variety OF industries. The consequence OF the dis
iri1uuon OF the prisoners on larger number OF
Industries Is that each branch IS restricted TO rel
atiycly small number of workmen. and hence free
labor has no occasion to feGr an injurious compe
tltlOn.
IL ENGrANp.-The contract system Is not In ex
istence i'm the English convict prisons, the indus
tries being managed wholly by the administration.
Inides are taught.
IL THE UNITED srirEs.-In general. the labor
OF the cOuyicis Is held by contractors at u fixed
sam per day, aud this varies from few cents to
something above 81 day. In few OF the prisons,
perhaps a tenth part Of the whole number the
whole prison labor Is managed by the prison al.
lnlnistratiOn, and In nearly all some part Of the
labor Is 10 managed, especially when the building
or enlarging Of the prison Is going on. IL requirS
great skin and business capacity In the head of n
prison To manage its industries aud for this reason
such management Is extremely liable TO failure
ON the other hand the contract system often intro
duces monil and financial corruption, Injuries dsC-
pine aud denOralizes The conyicts.
THE CONTRACT AND LEASE SYSTEM.
The foregoing summaries OF reports, il is
TO be borne in mind, were made at the In
ternational Prison congress OF 1872. The
contract labor" system mentioned so fire.
quenuy is not the "lease' system. The
distinction was made by DR.. Wines at the
National Prison Reform congress in 1873
at Baltimore, as the following excerpt from
the record OF the proceedings will show:
'Dr Wines, OF New York, said that with
all Difference 10 the two eminent gentle
men who had last addressed the congress,
he conceived that there was u material
difference between tbs leasing system and
the contract system, and, although he did
not like the latter he considered the former
greatly more objectionable. Under the
contract system the labor only was hired
out; while the whole care OF the prisoners,
the discipline, the clothing, the bedding,
the food, the medical attendance. the re-
lgious and secular instruction, the
hours OF labor. etc, were retained
in the hands OF the authorities
But, under the leasing system, all
this was changed. The whole control and
management OF the prison, including the
material and moral interests OF the prison.
crs were turned over TO the lessee, who
WIS sometimes an individual and some
times business company, but always n
party whose cole object was 10 grow rich
first out Of what the conyicts could earn,
and next out Of what could be saved from
the cost Of feeding, clothing and housing
them. The prison was let "a he under.
| stood H. for term Of years 20 tine party
who offered the highest bonus b. the State
over and above the keep and care Of the
prisoners. Other considerations might
possibly come in, but this was the main
and controlling one. lie looked upon II
as q system objectionable 10 the last dc.
gree. IL was the same system against
which John Howard, a hundred years ago,
lifted up his voice and employed his pen.
That was the English system Of his day.
lie had had some opportunity Of learning
the state Of public opinion IN some Of the
States where the system hal been tried in
| this country. He first met the system in
Illinois in 1885, where lac found public
sentiment unanimous, or nearly 70,
against il; and a year or two
later II was crushed out. He
next went TO Missouri, whprc the
system had previously existed, bat public
opinion had destroyed Il. He then passed
over 10 Kentucky, where the system wis
| then and IL still in vogue. But pyCn there
those most closely connected with 1.-THE
| prison inspectors. for example -werc
his judgment, the worst system that hu-
man ingenuity could devise
II was. ai this same session OF the Ma.
tional Prison Reform congress, that Gen. II.
D. Egglcslun read a report on the penal
institutions Of Mississippi, In which he
said:
"Oging 10 want Of accommodation Tor
MI the prisoners In the present building.
IL has been, for the past few yc1u, found
necessary, under thc authority oi law. 10
loase the labor OF the surplus cunyicts
without the prison walls. They have BEEN
employed on plantations and in the con
/ aruciion OF railroads For their protcc.
| ton, the most Jealous restrictions have
been placed upon the lessccs nevertheless.
the position Of this particular class has
/ been a source 81 much public uncIsinoss.
/ The Legislature, during Us last session,
| though Il inaugnrated many Wholesome
/ reforms and abolished many Objectionable
/ features in the prison management, did
not feel that u could make any
changes for the better IN thisdircciion, ox.
ccpt pruspcctiyely II made provision Ion
the purchase Of q site Tor and the con.
siruciion " new building. which will.
| when completed, afford ample arcUmmo.
dailon Or all our conyiris within its walls.
| The board Of inspectors show a keen up.
probation Of this unsatisfactory mode oi
employing convict's labor The supcrn.
icndcnt hiiuscli Ia his report 10 the In.
specion. In which he describes NJ length
| the condition OF this class ~ conyicts and
their removal from the amclloriting IN.
fluenccs which be j. enabled 10 throw
around those within the walls, thus gives
/ expression 10 his very great anxiety on the
subject. But submit tina, Il isprciudicial
10 the best interests ot the prisoners; and
that The very intent OF the law itself Is dc.
/ L. -. - L. III ~ =